"The TNEP book, The Natural Advantage of Nations, will be a very useful educational tool for government and industry in showing how to make the right steps toward a sustainable economy. The Natural Advantage of Nations will provide a graphic and compelling view of the kind of future we all might have if we truly commit to achieving sustainable development."Dr John Cole, Environmental Protection Agency Queensland

In 2007 the
National Framework for Energy Efficiency provided
funding for the first survey of energy efficiency
education across all Australian universities teaching
engineering education. The survey asked the question,
‘What is the state of education for energy efficiency
in Australian engineering education?’. There
was an excellent response to the survey, with 48 course
responses from lecturers across 27 universities from
every state and territory in Australia, and 260 student
responses from 18 courses
across 8 universities from all 6 states.

It is concluded
from the survey findings that the state of education
for energy efficiency in Australian engineering education
is currently highly variable and ad hoc across universities
and engineering disciplines.

The key
findings of the survey are as follows:

1) Location of Content in Engineering Programs

a) The data suggests that energy efficiency education
is not embedded across all engineering disciplines.
Mechanical and electrical engineering students appear
more likely to be taught energy efficiency content
in their degree programs, followed by environmental,
civil and chemical engineering students. Energy efficiency
education across other discipline areas appears to
be based on the individual interests and research
pursuits of the lecturers involved rather than strategic
integration across universities that is based on the
needs of each discipline.

b) The inclusion of energy efficiency content in any
course containing energy efficiency content appears
to be driven by formal program requirements and the
personal and research motivations of the individual
lecturers.

c) Energy efficiency appears to be taught largely
within well established courses (also called units
or subjects depending on the university) that have
been run by experienced lecturers for more than five
years. Energy efficiency content appears to be mostly
taught as part of a broader content area to second
and third year undergraduate students. In addition
there are a number of courses on more targeted energy
efficiency topics in fourth year undergraduate, and
postgraduate studies.

d) It appears that most students are not aware of
how energy efficiency education is different at different
universities, indicating that this is not a strong
motivator for choosing to study at a certain university.
Students do not appear to be clear on where in their
degree program energy efficiency is taught. Students
also appear unsure about what amount of such content
should be in their degree.

2) Level of Integration of Topical Issues
in Energy Efficiency

a) The level of integration of topical energy efficiency
issues into courses appears to be very low. Even mainstream
topics like ‘the link between greenhouse gas
emissions and global temperature change’ and
‘carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions
from energy generation’ were covered in detail
by less than a third of those courses surveyed, and
mentioned by less than half.

b) The survey suggests that students across undergraduate
and postgraduate levels think they understand the
terms ‘sustainable development’ and ‘energy
efficiency’ very well, and are making some connection
to issues in the media. However students appear to
have a low to moderate appreciation of how ‘energy
efficiency’ might be directly related to their
future careers.

‘Energy efficiency content’ is a broad
term that covers many aspects of curriculum. Hence,
this survey separated energy efficiency content into
energy efficiency ‘fundamental principles and
base theory’, ‘knowledge/ information’
(for example demonstrating how principles and theory
behave and why this knowledge is useful to engineer
energy efficiency solutions and systems), and ‘application’
of the principles, theory, and knowledge/ information
(for example through case studies and worked
examples).

Within ‘fundamental principles and base theory’,
the survey further distinguished between ‘general
design theory’ (for example addressing concepts
such as embedded energy, resource productivity, life
cycle assessment, and demand side management); and
‘technical design theory’ (for example
addressing concepts such as the whole system design
methodology for calculations).

a) Despite the students’ perception of how well
they understand the term ‘energy efficiency’
and the extent of energy efficiency education, the
data suggests that most did not have an in-depth understanding
of the surveyed principles and theory.

b) While lecturers appear to be engaging with energy
efficiency knowledge/information, there appears to
be a low level of student exposure to energy efficiency
theory. In particular, the extent to which energy
efficiency concepts and principles are included in
courses appears to be low to very low. Three areas
of content that are highlighted by the survey as not
being taught in detail and not understood by students
include: 1) Product Stewardship & Responsibility;
2) Decoupling energy utility profits from kilowatt-hours
sold; and 3) Incremental Efficiency versus Whole System
Design.

c) Student exposure to energy efficiency information
and knowledge appears to be moderate. However, the
extent to which energy efficiency and productivity
content is taught in engineering programs appears
to be low. The extent to which courses address roles
and responsibilities in energy efficiency is very
low. This also aligns with the observed low level
of course content about product stewardship and responsibilities.

d) Student exposure to applying energy efficiency
principles and theory and information/knowledge to
worked examples appears to be generally low to moderate.
The data suggests that quite a number of courses may
not be using case studies. Case studies appear to
be less likely to go beyond the traditional sectors
of industry and energy utilities. Popular case studies
include motor systems, boilers, air-conditioning systems,
lighting, and energy efficiency gains in appliances
and equipment.

e) Many courses that include some energy efficiency
content in their courses do not appear to include
energy efficiency related reading resources for students.
Together with results regarding content coverage,
the survey indicates a general shortfall in the inclusion
of energy efficiency theory, knowledge and application
in Australian engineering education.

4) Energy Efficiency Education: Curriculum
Renewal

a) Although lecturers are uncertain as to whether
they are meeting expectations with regard to the type
of energy efficiency content in their courses, they
clearly value: 1) the inclusion of good content within
their course; 2) the inclusion of team project work
and practical and industry relevant material; and
3) a problem-based learning approach to learning.
This list is important in suggesting that curriculum
renewal strategies should aim to benefit courses in
these areas.

b) For more than half of the surveyed courses, lecturers
report that their course could include more (indepth)
energy efficiency content, particularly in: 1) applying
energy efficiency theory and knowledge; and 2) including
knowledge and information on the topic. There appears
to be more hesitancy with regard to energy efficiency
theory and principles, perhaps due to lecturers not
being aware of content, or because of competing content
areas.

c) Of those courses where lecturers said more could
be done, lecturers are keen to receive assistance,
particularly through accessing case studies on energy
efficiency examples in engineering (i.e. worked real-life
examples that show how the theory and knowledge is
applied). They are also keen to access lists of good
material (for example audio-visual materials, text
books and other references), and are keen to have
access to a customised set of readings on energy efficiency
for engineers generally. Lecturers do not appear keen
to receive professional development (i.e. additional
training) on energy efficiency.

d) Almost
all of the lecturers wanting assistance with accessing
content about energy efficiency prefer the resources
to be available through open access, online learning
modules, rather than restricted access online modules,
or intensive short courses .
e) Key perceived challenges for lecturers in improving
their course content, are: 1) the potential for course
content overload; and 2) having insufficient time
to prepare new materials. In addition some lecturers
do not appear to be aware of content that is beyond
‘introductory’.

f) Some lecturers indicated preference for third party
endorsement of materials, but comments indicated that
the reason and messaging of the endorsement needs
to be clear. These lecturers preferred Engineers Australia
and the (former) Department of Environment and Water
Resources as endorsers to stimulate the curriculum
renewal process in energy efficiency education. Some
lecturers also indicated they would look to other
universities to lead through developing and/or using
materials and endorsing them.

TNEP Core Partners in Research, Education and Policy Development

Website created as an in-kind donation, and now serviced by Izilla Pty Ltd, with hosting provided by Melbourne IT.

Between 2007 and 2010 TNEP was provided in-kind administrative hosting by Griffith University and the Australian National University, previously by Engineers Australia. From 2011 onwards TNEP has been co-hosted by QUT, Curtin University and the University of Adelaide.